Debunking 0.5x A Button Presses
In his video “SM64 – Watch For Rolling Rocks – 0,5x A Presses (Commentated)”, pannenkoek2012 claimed to have completed Super Mario 64’s Watch For Rolling Rocks Star in 0,5 A presses. He could not have been more wrong. The 0,5 A Press myth is a horrible insult to A-press Studies, the most important scientific field of the past decade, and the greatest lie ever sold to the general public. This stuff really makes my blood boil, so as a real A Press expert, I’m going to debunk this harmful myth. Pancake Man did not do Watch For Rolling Rocks in 0,5 A Presses. Does that mean TJ ‘Henry’ Yoshi’s claims are correct? No, they are not, because there is no reason to dispute the general concept of a partial A press. The basic reasoning behind pannenkoek’s 0,5 A Presses claims are legitimate: ”An A press actually has three parts to it. When A is pressed, when A is held, and when A is released” So, a full A press consists of three parts. Pannenkoek only uses two of these parts in his Watch For Rolling Rocks run, namely holding and releasing, so therefore, it was not a full 1 A press. But, foolishly, he then proceeds to call it a “Half A Press”. His reasoning is that, in an A Button Challenge, the mission counts as either 0 or 1 A Presses depending on whether you count a single mission or the whole run, averaging 0,5. But this is just a mathematically and scientifically wrong method, and only works in the narrow context of SM64 ABC runs. In the noble field of A-Press Studies, we use proper maths to determine A Press counts, rather than guesswork and anecdotal reasoning. Pannenkoek himself clearly states that there are three parts to an A Press, and he uses two of them. Each part of the A press counts equally towards the total of three required for a full A Press. Therefore, the A Press performed in the Watch For Rolling Rocks is not 0,5 A Press, but 2/3 A Press. Because there are three parts to an A Press, and not an even amount, Half A Presses are mathematically impossible. With the above logic, we can also rule out the possibility of a 1/3 A Press. An A Press has to start with the depressing of the A Button, and it’s physically impossible to do that in isolation. After depressing the A Button, there are two things you can do: either you let go immediately, which amounts to releasing the button, or you keep some pressure on, which amounts to holding the button. In both cases, two parts of the A Press are used, and thus both are worth 2/3 A Press. Other options are impossible. All of the above is just the tip of the iceberg. Thus far, I have assumed the depressing of the A Button is a binary event: either it is depressed, or it isn’t. But the reality is not quite so simple. It’s possible, albeit difficult, to partially depress the A Button. For example, you can only press it 60% of the full way. Do we count this as one entire part of the A Press? I don’t, because it’s not quite as much depressing/holding/releasing as a full part. The N64 does not register, say, a 40% depression level, but my field of science is about the human interpretation of A Button Pressing, not the digital interpretation. Therefore, each part of the press needs to be counted only as much as the button is depressed. To demonstrate, I shall use an example. Suppose you depress the A Button 70% of the way, hold it at 70% and then release it all the way back. Each part of the A Press is just 70% of a full one, and so each part is worth just 0,7 Parts Of An A Press (POAAP). This culminates into the following calculation: 0,7 + 0,7 + 0,7 = 2,1 POAAP 2,1/3 = 0,7 Therefore, this example amounts to 0,7 A Press. Assuming a three-part process, we can draw a formula from the above, in which D is the percentage of depressing and A is the amount of A Presses: D/100 = A Further simplified, this means that POAAP is equal to the amount of A Presses. If only two parts of the A Press are used (depress/release or depress/hold), the following formula is used: (2/3) x (D/100) = A (or (2/3) x POAAP = A) This also means that a 0,5 A Press is in fact possible, if all three parts of an A Press are performed to 50% or if two parts are performed to 75%. However, this is not the technique used by pannenkoek2012 in his Watch For Rolling Rocks video, and it therefore does not validate his claims. These are just the basics. More complicated A Presses are possible. Suppose you depress the A Button by 40%, hold it there, then depress it 30% more, hold it there, release it by 25%, hold it there and finally release it all the way. This A Press has seven parts to it: * Depressing the A Button by 40% (value: 0,4 POAAP) * Holding the A button at 40% (value: 0,4 POAAP) * Depressing the A Button by 30% (value: 0,3 POAAP) * Holding the A button at 70% (value: 0,7 POAAP) * Releasing the A Button by 25% (value: 0,25 POAAP) * Holding the A button at 45% (value: 0,45 POAAP) * Depressing the A Button by 45% (value: 0,45 POAAP) From this, we can draw the following calculations: 0,4 + 0,4 + 0,3 + 0,7 + 0,25 + 0,45 + 0,45 = 2,95 POAAP 2,95/3 = 0,983333 Therefore, this A Press is worth 0,983333 A Presses. In calculating A presses such as these, the separate A Presses are cut off by the moments of 0% depression, also known as the Neutral Position. In Super Mario 64 or the Nintendo 64 controller in general, there is currently no use for more elaborate A Presses such as the above. Like I said before, the N64 doesn’t register these Presses. However, other buttons on other devices do, and this technique can be used for those buttons. An example are the ‘trigger’ style LT and RT buttons on an Xbox controller, which register the degree to which they are depressed. The seven-part, 0,983333 A Press I calculated earlier is definitely plausible in, say, a racing game. It can also apply to Super Mario 64 when played on an N64 emulator hooked to an Xbox controller. If the A Button is mapped to LT or RT, 0,5 A Presses become a possibility. I suggest the tools used in Tool Assisted Speedruns (such as the A Button Challenge itself) should implement the possibility for more elaborate A Presses, for the sake of accuracy and complying to A-Button Studies requirements. The pannenkoek2012 was a cute, popularised depiction of the science behind A Presses, but very simplistic and factually incorrect. Next time you need some information on counting A Presses, consult a real expert, kiddo. Category:Jokes